Lade Inhalt...

Marketing Concept for the Friedrich Naumann Foundation on the Example of the Regional Office in Johannesburg, RSA

Diplomarbeit 2003 98 Seiten

BWL - Offline-Marketing und Online-Marketing



1. Differences between Non-Governmental and Non-Profit Organisations
1.1 What are Non-Profit Organisations?
1.2 Problems with and Changes in Non-Profit Organisations
1.3 What are Non-Governmental Organisations?
1.4 Where are the Differences?

1. Political Foundations in Germany
1.1 Development and Function of Political Parties in Germany
1.2 The Idea of Political Foundations
1.3 Financing Situation
1.4 Political Foundations Abroad
1.5 Foundations in General

2. Tasks and Objectives of Political Foundations in General
2.1 In General
2.2 More Specifically
2.2.1 Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung
2.2.2 Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung
2.2.3 Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung
2.2.4 Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung
2.2.5 Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung
2.2.6 Friedrich Naumann Stiftung

3. Friedrich Naumann Foundation
3.1 The Liberal Idea and its Philosophy
3.1.1 Historical Development
3.1.2 Today’s Situation
3.2 Tasks and Objectives of the FNF in General
3.3 Tasks and Objectives of the FNF in Johannesburg, RSA
3.3.1 Tasks
3.3.2 Objectives

1. Overview
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Historical South Africa
1.3 Basic Target Groups in Johannesburg
1.4 The New Target Group
1.5 Questionnaires
1.5.1 Personal
1.5.2 Technical

2. Segmentation of Target Groups
2.1 In General
2.2 International Segmentation
2.3 In Johannesburg
2.3.1 Recent Problem
2.3.2 Recent Solution
3. Targeting Target Groups
3.1 Target Groups in General
3.2 Target Groups in Johannesburg
3.3 Possibilities

4. Positioning the Product or Service
4.1 In General
4.2 In Johannesburg

5. Porter’s 5 Factor Model
5.1 The Model
5.2 The Application
5.3 Competitors

6. Success Factors
6.1 SWOT Analysis
6.2 Confrontation Matrix

7. A New Marketing Tool
7.1 The Egghead
7.2 The Player

8. Reflections
8.1 Summary
8.2 Forecast

1. Questionnaires
1.1. Personal Questionnaire
1.2. Technical Questionnaire
1.3. Entry-Exit Questionnaire
1.4. Evaluation Personal Questionnaire

2. Bibliography
2.1. Authors
2.2. Thesis

3. Addresses
3.1. Friedrich Naumann Foundation and its Partners in Germany
3.2. Friedrich Naumann Foundation Abroad
3.3. Friedrich Naumann Foundation’s Partners Abroad
3.4. Other Liberal Organisations and Partners

1. Differences between Non-Profit and Non-Governmental Organisations

A company with no permanent cash-flow is literally called a nonprofit organisation. But some prefer the term not-for-profit instead of non-profit organisation.[5]

1.1. What are Non-Profit Organisations?

Philip Kotler calls managers of non-profit organisations (NPO’s) administration officials, employees in the education, directors of museums, hospital administrations, family planers, religious leaders, foundation’s responsible authorities, social reformers, town planers and the like.[6] He continues to mention specific non-profit areas like the public health system, education, public administration, and politics.[7]

Broere and Heuvel say NPO’s are permanently defined as not-for-profit oriented organisations.[8] They continue and call NPO’s supplier of products which does not have the objective to make profit.[9] They go much further and call it “the breakthrough of profit orientation is the main feature of NPO’s.”[10] It is interesting that they do not mention the service attribute. But they found out that NPO suppliers do not act conformal with the market. The reason for that behaviour is NPO’s historical background of solidarity orientation.[11] According to the authors NPO’s permanent existence is not addicted from the demand side[12] because they get their money from other sources like the government or donators. They differentiate three categories of organisations: the reactive one (a paid mission which does not change), the adaptable one (dealing with strategies), and the entrepreneurial one (finding new chances and transforming them into successful products or innovations).[13]

Rados means that a for-profit organisation (FPO) operates to enrich owners and managers. This is not allowed for a NGO and no surplus is passed on to individuals.[14] Firstly, he mentions NGO’s non-profit status which does not prohibit organisation’s profit making business, e.g. to sell goods and services higher than the costs.[15] He refers to Clarkson who differentiates that certain rights or claims which might benefit a NPO are not transferable via sale as in an FPO. Clarkson continues that employees in a NPO do not have an exclusive claim on monetary flows and non-money benefits what is characteristic for FPO’s.[16] In Rados view two approaches differentiate NPO from FPO: the functional and the economical approach. The latter sees the NPO formed for a purpose for stakeholders without passing monetary profits. The first means to list typical non-profit activities - if an organisation do these things it is a NPO.[17] Secondly, Rados means it might be possible to most lively needs to be filled by relying solely on NPO’s even if he adds that it does not seem to be practical.[18] He mentions plenty NPO’s exist and states that no-one knows how many NPO’s really do: “Their variety is bewildering”[19] -alone the Encyclopedia of Associations needs 1.500 pages to list the US national ones he says. Normally, NPO’s receive tax deductible contributions.[20] As Rados calls the line between NPO’s and NGO’s sometimes thin[21], Anthony and Young call it fuzzy[22] because ”service is a more vague, less measurable concept than profit, it is more difficult to measure performance in a NPO”.[23] They agree more or less with Rados when they state “A NPO is an organisation whose goal is something other than earning a profit for its owners” and add “usually its goal is to provide services.”[24]

Wilbur states that “management practices of well-running NPO’s are not different from management practices of successful FPO’s.”[25] He follows Rados, Anthony and Young, and mentions more than 1,5 mln. NPO’s which were registered in the Internal Revenue Service from 1996. He argues with reasons of evolution that changed the economy from a simple agricultural one over a manufacturing to a service and technology oriented one.[26] He interprets the term non-profit more technically, i.e. not to distribute profit either dividends nor capital gains. He adds the features of having no owners like FPO’s in a non-profit organisation and agrees with Rados that surpluses will not be distributed among the managers. He closes with the hind that “not-for-profit cannot be for-loss” and that “a NPO today must operate as effectively and efficiently as an FPO”, otherwise it will go out of business.[27]

1.2. Problems with and Changes in Non-Profit Organisations

Most NPO’s are service organisations.[28] That can be problematical because services can not be stored. Service organisations are also labour intensive which makes it difficult to control them. It is difficult to measure service quantities because services are not inspectable in advance and quality. Service judgements suffer as well because they are subjective and measuring instruments and objective quality standards did not exist in 1988.[29] Another problem is the fact that NPO’s face competition with just some smaller FPO’s. Their big disadvantage: non-profits are also non tax payers. Therefore, a Business Coalition for Fair Competition has been formed after some business people took part at the White House Conference on Small Businesses in summer 1986. Their main argument: non-profit revenues rose from $ 114 bln in 1975 to $ 314 bln. in 1983.[30]

1.3. What are Non-Governmental Organisations?

Pogorelskaja starts her survey with the declaration political foundations are non-governmental organisations (NGO’s). She qualifies by saying that despite most German NGO’s want to help the poor impartial and apolitical political foundations want even more[31] (Part III, 1.2.). She adds that political foundations distinguish from NGO’s due to their commitment to official political orientation. But, similarly, they act like NGO’s in home affairs and internationally.[32] Just like most Third World Aid Policies political foundations have similarly tasks as NGO’s. For instance, fostering ecological acting and democratically law and order, supporting sustainable economical development, fighting poverty, and preventing crisis.[33]

Gupta believes that “NGO’s alone cannot build a civil society but they can blow the whistle and exert pressure for change.”[34] He sees a great role for NGO’s if the state withdraws from its core sectors of public services because the state is actually not able to reach the poor. He mentions the governmental interest to delegate these tasks to NGO’s because they do not have the power to act like a political competitor and give the state authorities more time for other objectives. He asks to what extent NGO’s are able to reinforce self-respect and pride amongst people. Gupta sees a big problem in NGO’s if they cannot create “an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect within the organisation … and towards the people with whom the NGO works”.[35] The ‘magic term’ for Gupta is “the P2P communication and networking” - P2P i.e. people to people.[36]

NGO’s finance themselves through donations and / or international help programs and overtake many genuine governmental tasks agrees even Chossudovsky.[37] ‘In its broadest sense, the term ‘non government’ refers to organisations which are not based in government and also not created to earn profit. This definition refers more to what an organisation is not, rather than to what it is and can be applied to many organisations. A strength of NGO’s is their ability to form close linkages to local communities and to engender community ownership and participation in development efforts. NGO’s respond quickly to new circumstances and do experiment with innovative approaches. NGO’s act as successful intermediaries between actors in the development arena. They (should) build bridges between people and communities on one side and governments, development institutions, as well as donors and development agencies on the other.’[38]

1.4. Where are the Differences?

‘The meaning of a NGO does not contain every private organisation and is not defined under the globally unified view. But it is generally considered to be a private organisation to contribute in the fields of environment, human rights, development and so on. The purpose of a (civil) NPO is to act voluntarily for the public, with some independent regulations. Such a (civil) organization including every private organisation except governmental or profit-making companies shows six features to identify: it is formal, non-governmental, not profit-sharing, independently managing, voluntary, and has or offers a public benefit. To sum up one may say a NPO includes a NGO. The only difference is that NGO’s values non governmental© while NPO’s values non-profit© although both of them feature non governmental and non-profit.’[39]

1. Political Foundations in Germany

1.1. Development and Function of Political Parties in Germany

Political parties became more and more important due to the fact of changes in the idea of equality of humans and its significance around the 19th century. But they became also important through a changed view and the wealth of every single individual when people were treated according to their personal skills and their intellectual knowledge.[40] Through this “equal treatment” after abolishing the aristocratic philosophy and the principle of authorities all votes received the same weight in the developing democratic process. Citizens were now able to use the democratic opinion-forming process as a political tool. That enlarged chances for every individual to meet in political action-groups to express wishes, hopes, and needs.[41] To draw a clear dividing line between political parties and organisations, associations, and civic action groups political parties were declared as a constitutional institution.[42] Accordingly, political parties are unifications of civil rights, which influence government’s expression of one’s will with an independent organisation.[43] Following negative experiences in the Weimar Republic (1918 - 1933) where political parties were forced to be neutral in the field of state authority, and not to forget the Third Reich (1933 - 1945), the democracy should become more transparent. Therefore, from 1949 the democratic structures in Germany were to be strengthened and the public understanding were to be enlarged and opened. Through Article 21 of the German Constitution (Grundgesetz) only political parties were mentioned to obey this task.[44] A main problem occurred due to the funding of the political parties which should finance themselves only through donors.

1.2. The Idea of Political Foundations

Political parties were not allowed to accept money for political education work. Some say that was one reason political parties invented political foundations. Another reason is less domestically more the political work foundations do abroad. Here, they are sometimes seen as competitors to other German institutions like the Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) or Deutscher Entwicklungsdienst (DED). Both organisations think they are responsible to help in foreign countries.[45] The differences between technical organisations and political foundations lie more in the help with special projects. Foundations are inside foreign countries for a permanent time and building networks. Therefore, it is not a competition but more a good basis the foundations create and the technical organisations can benefit from. However, spying activities are certainly not included in the work of the political foundations that a Turkish public prosecutor from a court in Ankara claimed all the German political foundations since August 2002 for.[46]

1.3. Financing Situation

No political foundation in Germany is financed through interest earnings from their own capital. Most of the money comes from public funds, around 90% from federal institutions like the Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit (BMZ), the Auswärtiges Amt (AA), the Bundesministerium des Innern (BMI), and the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Wissenschaft (BMBW). Around 10% of the money comes from federal state institutions, more or less received from conference and seminar fees. Only a very small amount cash flows from donations.

1.4. Political Foundations Abroad

Comparable political foundations as in Germany are generally unknown in Europe with exceptions in Austria, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Belgium, and in the Netherlands. The latter two receive their revenues from the government but their task is more to finance the parties. In Austria foundations are called political academies and concentrate more on educating future leaders similar to foundation work in Portugal. Only British foundations work abroad as the Germans do but they are financed strictly private. In France, a discussion about initiating political foundations at all is still going on. Interesting that the French government looks precisely how the German foundations are organised.[47]

1.5. Foundations in General

According to an interview in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung[48] Brickwedde (General Secretary of the German Ecological Foundation -Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt, DBU) calls foundations civilian engagement and selfless devotion. The article cites the US American author John Steinbeck who does not see a biographic change from an heroic entrepreneur to an altruistic charitable person. Steinbeck assumes that foundation’s ambition is still the same but giving something supports the founder with the same or even more triumph than simply taking something. He closes with the assumption that donating might be only a spiritual kind of greed. According to the article foundations in general are positioned between individuals and the state. Therefore, their role is a supplement one and foundations carry risks no one else, not even the government, would finance. It is also said that foundations are not competitors to environmental or nature preserving NGO’s. They are just over a long time earmarked or member-less organisations - the only fact all German foundations have in common. With a yearly amount of 18 billion German foundations play an important role in the society.

2. Tasks and Objectives of Political Foundations

2.1. In General

There are six political foundations in Germany which have more or less the same main tasks as follows: they are all on duty domestically and abroad. They activate discussions about political ideas for all German citizens[49] and are closely related with the political aims of the German parties. However, according to their statutes foundations use their fully political sovereignty and organise themselves independently. In Germany, it is prohibited for political foundations to support political elections from or for their “political mothers”. Furthermore, all political foundations have to identify with the constitution and the constitutional principles, and they shall foster civic education among the citizens. Foundations work together internationally with their partners and shall do research in historical, political, and social fields as well as fostering art and culture.[50] But it is also true to call foundations a tool of the political parties with a strong accent on their foreign policy. Many Germans are not aware of political foundation’s tasks and objectives despite the important work these institutions try to fulfil.[51] One of their most known publicly work is to promote talented people. Around 1% of all students, Germans and foreign students in Germany and German students abroad, are supported annually.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Table 1, Enrolled Students at all German Universities[52]

2.2. More Specifically

The six political foundations in Germany and their goals:

2.2.1. The Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung is closely related to the party of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). It was founded in 1964 and follows christian-democratic goals for public welfare. Therefore, the foundation wants among other things imparting political knowledge, and researches and documents the historical development of the christian-democratic movement. It supports the European unification process and fosters international communication through information interchange and meetings.

2.2.2. The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung is closely related to the party of the Social Democrats (SPD). It was founded in 1925, forbidden by the Nazis in 1933, and re-founded in 1946. In 1954, the foundation was established as a public welfare oriented foundation. Its self-declared goal is to encourage democratic education in Germany and to foster international cooperation in a democratic mind.

2.2.3. The Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung is closely related to the party of the Christian Social Union (CSU)[53] and was founded in 1967 in Munich. Its main goals are research and analysis of political problems and the educational institution arrange information- and working-seminars. The foundation works intensively abroad. It fosters democracy in middle, east, and south Europe and has projects in Africa, Asia, and Latin America where the foundation focuses on poverty, ecology, crime, and growth in population.

2.2.4. The Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung is closely related to the party of Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen. It was founded in 1988 out of plenty smaller groups. The main goal is to foster gender political democracy and political education for a better knowledge in ecological terms. The foundation works for visions on the crisis of the social welfare state and a future for Europe. The foundation wants to rule according to Böll’s principle: “Intervention is the only way to stay realistic.”

2.2.5. The Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung is closely related to the party of Democratic Socialism (PDS)[54] and was founded in 1990. The foundation understands itself as a forum for discussions about critical thinking and political alternatives, and as a partner of international cooperation. It supports science and research as well as arts and culture. The foundation promotes political education and supports social movements and organisations.[55]

2.2.6. Friedrich Naumann Stiftung (in the following called the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, FNF) is closely related to the party of the Free Democrats, i.e. Liberals (FDP). It was founded in 1958 under support of the first president of the Federal Republic of Germany Theodor Heuss. He named the foundation after his teacher, model, and ideological father Friedrich Naumann. There was no doubt for Naumann that a strong democracy needs responsible citizens. Just if the individual takes part on the political process in a responsible way, if the individual interferes and presents its opinion - only than a liberal society will grow.[56] The foundation works on the liberal basis, and is like the other foundations public welfare oriented. Their academy in Gummersbach is called after Theodor Heuss.

3. Friedrich Naumann Foundation

3.1. The Liberal Idea and its Philosophy

‘For liberals freedom is an end in itself. Without individual freedom no human being can survive and no society can work well. This is even more obvious after the fall of the German Wall and the collapse of the communist system in the former USSR and the start of market opening in the People Republic of China.’

3.1.1. Historical Development of Liberalism and Foundations

‘The liberal idea is not a new fashion or a product of the modern “Zeitgeist”. The liberal philosophy was already shaped in ancient and medieval times where primitive peoples and tribes fought for their personal freedom and scope for development. In 1690, for the first time John Locke mentioned in his book “Two Treatises on Government” publicly that an individual belongs to itself. A state is a result of a contract people sign to protect their rights for freedom, life, and own property. In 1776, Adam Smith added in his ‘Inquiry into Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations’ that “… the obvious and simple system of natural liberty [whereby] every man, so long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest in his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man…”.[57] Frédéric Bastiat thought in the mid 19th century about property and liberty after that property comes before law because law’s task is the protection of individual rights and not their invention.[58] He added: “Not because there are laws there is property, but because there is property there are laws!”[59] Karl Popper said 1956 the liberal principle claims to reduce every restriction of individual freedom caused by inevitable social cohabitation. From these core competencies of liberal thinking the following major pillars evolved: restricted state activities, free market economy, and peace. They gained pace after the US American (1776) and the French revolution (1789) and liberalism became a worldwide political movement for the 19th century. Constitutional states were implemented and freedom of opinions was tolerated. In the economy liberalism created wealth for masses due to free markets. That was the basis for the industrial revolution which abolished ongoing famine. Since 1847 there were no more famines during times of peace in Europe. In 1927, Ludwig von Mises said wealth created by liberalism decreased children famine and prolonged viability through improved living conditions. He added it was not only available for a few rich persons but for all.

3.1.2. Today’s Situation

At the end of the 19th century conservatives and socialists became stronger. But after WW II and the end of the nationalism in Germany there is a renaissance for liberalism in western Europe which provides and guarantees wealth and peace.[60] This is not astonishing because liberals are individualists, i.e. liberalism embraces individual freedom as the goal.[61] Therefore, it is only logical that all collective systems like nationalism, communism, conservatism, and even socialism had failed or will fail in the long run. All mankind is different and not equal and altogether are responsible citizens. “Man is first and foremost a being endowed with the power of independent thought and action, and with the ability to distinguish right from wrong.”[62] A sentence that explains the liberal idea and its philosophy well. “The state is the largest fiction where everybody makes an effort to live on everybody’s cost.”[63] Liberalism is a very dynamic, adaptable, and pragmatic belief offering solutions for today’s ‘and tomorrow’s’ problems.[64]

3.2. Tasks and Objectives of the FNF in General

“That we try to become free ourselves how much ever will be possible!”

The basic aims for the FNF then and now are still the same: supporting the idea of liberalism all over the world, strengthening democratic structures and, last but not least, acting as a kind of trouble-maker in a non-free and over-regulated world. As a foundation for liberal policy, the FNF is committed to freedom of opinion and action in all ways of life and all over the world. Such freedom can only be achieved if as many people as possible can be convinced for the cause of liberalism. Only they that understand political contexts can change them. And only they that know what freedom means can take up the causes of liberalism and democracy. That is why the FNF is working with its partners in over 60 countries to change people’s awareness and their pattern of behaviour.[66] Another publication of the FNF reads: ‘The goal is to ensure a future for liberal ideas, both at home and abroad. Therefore, the most important task (in Germany) is civic education. Only people who understand how politics work will succeed in changing the world. To exchange liberal ideas world wide the FNF promotes the international political dialogue and advises and supports groups, organisations, and liberal parties.’[67]

As Friedrich Naumann said in 1906: “The idea of liberalism has to be recreated. In the course of time it has lost so much of its clarity and attraction that it first has to rise like a new dawn in front of the people.” In that context the FNF gave itself the political principles which were agreed by the Board of Directors and approved by the Board of Trustees on September 24th, 1993. The preamble indicates ‘that the FNF acts on the basis of liberalism’ and continues ‘that the FNF is the foundation for ideas on liberty and training in freedom. Its aim is to contribute to the furtherance of the principle of freedom in human dignity in all sectors of society. It is the goal of liberal politics that all citizens should be able to live together in an open society: the civic society. Without freedom other human values cannot be realised. Each human being needs freedom in order to develop his or her talents and realise his or her potential. Without freedom the human spirit languishes, culture and science decay, and the economy stagnates. The spirit needs freedom like the body needs air to breathe. Each human being is an individual with his own ideas and desires. But one is also a social being, dependent on other human beings and under an obligation to them. Freedom and responsibility are inseparable. It determines the relationship between the individual and the community. Liberals base human relationships on free will, not coercion

- on the exchange of ideas and goods, free trade, reason, compassion, and responsibility. Voluntary associations promote mutual trust. They lead to the recognition of the values and goals of others and they deserve respect.’[68] In conclusion, the ‘Political Principles of the Work of the FNF’ speaks about the liberal politics and the individual, the civic society, the state, and the international cooperation in detail.

In the brochure “The Dialogue Programme International Academy for Leadership” it says: ‘The FNF is Germany’s foundation for the promotion of political liberalism. Its aim is the realisation of freedom and human dignity in all areas of life … This is done through civic education, political consultancy, and dialogue. The foundation’s activities are designed to make people more aware of their political environment, to encourage them to participate in the running of their affairs, and to find liberal answers to the pressing issues of our times. In doing so, it takes new ideas and experiences into account. The FNF believes that it has a special responsibility to provide information and assistance wherever freedom, the market economy, the rule of law, and democracy are only just beginning to establish a foothold for itself. As the only liberal institution of its kind in the world, the foundation provides a forum for encounter and exchange of ideas. Through international dialogue it contributes to the creation of a substructure upon which freedom can be built - also for the benefit of future generations and with the responsibilities towards them in mind.’[69] As Renate Schneider, member of the board of trustees of the FNF, said at an event on November 30th, 2002: „The events organised by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation are a fitness centre for public welfare and the courage of one’s convictions.”[70]

3.3. Tasks and Objectives of the FNF in Johannesburg, RSA

3.3.1. Tasks

‘The FNF operates from its Regional Office in Johannesburg since 1993 to focus more intensely on the political work of the foundation. It stays closely together with the South African liberals’[71] and cooperates with its partners in Ghana, Senegal, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, and Tanzania. ‘In those countries the liberal message is being discussed about human rights, i.e. human dignity, life, and freedom from slavery. Also about equality which means no discrimination and the rule of law which stands for a set of safeguards against arbitrary and tyrannical treatment by authorities. Individual freedom means people must decide for themselves and not to be told what to do all the time, and provided that in doing so they do not limit someone else’ freedom. Liberal democracy is another part of the liberal message being discussed in those countries. ‘Thus, democracy is not a liberalistic core value but it seems to be the only political system under which these values can really exist. But a liberal democracy demands for free and fair elections and additionally provides the mentioned above liberal core values: commitment to fundamental human rights, equality, rule of law, individual freedom, private property, and a free market. Furthermore, there must be a separation of power in a liberal democracy, i.e. parliament (legislative), government (executive), and courts (judicative) may not be in the same hands to avoid power abuse and corruption and to check and balance each other.’[72] It should be stated that liberals also in the African continent do care about compassion for the poor and they caring for other people because these are real fundamental liberal values. They follow more or less automatically the belief of liberal human rights and the individual freedom.[73]

3.3.2. Objectives

There are two main goals in the foundation’s work in South Africa. First, to contribute together with its partners (Part V, 3.) to continue the developing process for a formal-democratic political system as a real liberal democracy … and a decentralised decisive structure.[74] Secondly, FNF and its partners intercede that small and medium enterprises, self-help organisations, and private initiatives will be promoted with the goal of creating new jobs, the fight against poverty and for needed and stable liberal democratic structures.[75] The FNF uses the classical instruments of political education, political dialogues, and political advices to reach these goals. Therefore, the foundation organises seminars, conferences, workshops, consultancy talks, and campaigns. Their employees create political papers, publish or foster publications and literature, and uses and procures experts[76] for several meetings.

1. Overview

1.1. Introduction

What is marketing? There are many different explanations and approaches of explanations to describe the term as a whole. Kotler for instance says ‘… Marketing means an effective managing of substituting with different markets and shareholders for an organisation.’[77] Pelsmacker believes “Marketing is the process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion and distribution of ideas, goods and services to create and exchange value, and satisfy individual and organisational objectives.”[78] Aaker states “Marketing is by its very nature concerned with the interaction between the firm and the market place.”[79] Zerres calls Marketing a ‘modern philosophy for organisations’ and enlarges Pelsmacker’s statement by adding ‘present and future markets under monitoring organisation’s objectives and customer’s needs and wants’.[80] Laker states in his book ‘Marketing for Energy Suppliers’ ‘Marketing should be understand as a comprehensive and extensive orientation for the market of the concerned company.[81] What about Hatton’s idea that “Marketing is perhaps the oldest business discipline”?

[82] She justifies it by the fact that “certainly no product has ever had any value until a customer could be found for it.” [83]

All quoted statements share the similarity not to differentiate between for-profit and non-profit organisations. As a result, there are actually no big differences marketing a for-profit or a non-profit organisation in general (Part II.). However, some differences of terms and meanings like product, price, place, promotion, and the market itself do exist in details. Not to forget the difference between profit maximisation and benefit maximisation. As a result, why not agree on this definition for marketing:

Marketing is everything undertaken to widen organisational opportunities to make the brand more publicly known and to increase the distribution of products and services which enlarges the target group.[84]

1.2. Historical South African

To understand the South African and Johannesburg political and social situation a global overview of the actual market should be examined. Otherwise it might be difficult to know the targeted groups. Aaker calls it one of four major analysis’ as a part of the external analysis: environmental analysis.[85]

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Table 2, RSA Inhabitant’s Proportion

In 1905, a governmental commission recommended a separated development included less and worse education for black people. In 1910, black people were not allowed to vote anymore. They were not seen as South African citizens any longer and the laws of apartheid were enacted since 1948. Among other things that meant a prohibition of mixed marriages and sexual intercourse among different races, an individual segregation, the Group Areas Act (separated living areas for particular races) and the Separate Amenities Act (separated use of public utilities like beaches, busses, schools etc.). For easier control over black people they had to carry their personal identification documents with them permanently and were not allowed to move through cities on their own without a special permission. The Dutch Reform Church legitimated apartheid clerically: in their point of view the segregation was divinely-or-dained and the Boers were the chosen people to keep the purity of whites in the promised land as a holy mission. In 1913, with the Natives Land Act (law which regulates land property) black people should be deported to self-administered states called homelands which offered neither infrastructure nor industry. On 13% of the land 70% of the South African people should live in different homelands separated after tribal identity but regardless of their place of birth or origin.


[5] Anthony, R.N. and Young, D.W.: Management Control in Non-Profit Organizations, Irwin, 4th Edition, Illinois, USA, S. 49, 1988

[6] Kotler, S. VIII, a.a.O.

[7] Kotler, S. IX, a.a.O.

[8] Broere, F.P. and Heuvel, J.: Marketing Voor Non-Profit Organisaties, Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen, Nederlands, S. 23, 1998

[9] Broere and Heuvel, S. 27, a.a.O.

[10] Broere and Heuvel, S. 35, a.a.O.

[11] Broere and Heuvel, S. 33 - 34, a.a.O.

[12] Broere and Heuvel, S. 42, a.a.O.

[13] Broere and Heuvel, S. 43 - 45, a.a.O.

[14] Rados, David L.: Marketing for Non-Profit Organizations, Auburn House, Boston, USA, S. 7, 1980

[15] Rados, S. 5 - 7, a.a.O.

[16] Clarkson, W.K.: Some Implications of Property Rights in Hospital Management, in: Journal of Law and Economics 15, S. 363, 1973

[17] Rados, S. 7, a.a.O.

[18] Rados, S. 3, a.a.O.

[19] Rados, S. 3 and 4, ebd.

[20] Rados, ebd.

[21] Rados, S. 7, a.a.O.

[22] Anthony and Young, ebd.

[23] Anthony and Young, S. 50, a.a.O.

[24] Anthony and Young, S. 49, a.a.O.

[25] Smith, Bucklin & Associates Inc, Edited by Wilbur, R.H.: The Complete Guide To Non-Profit Management, 2nd Edition by John Wiley & Sons Inc. USA, S. VII, 2000

[26] Smith, Bucklin & Associates, S. IX, a.a.O.

[27] Smith, Bucklin & Associates, S. X, a.a.O.

[28] Anthony and Young, S. 61, a.a.O.

[29] Anthony and Young, ebd.

[30] Anthony and Young, S. 62 - 63. a.a.O.

[31] Pogorelskaja, S.W.: Die parteinahen Stiftungen als Akteure und Instrumente der deutschen Außenpolitik, in: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, S. 29, B6-7/2002

[32] Pogorelskaja, S. 30, 35 - 36, a.a.O.

[33] Pogorelskaja, S. 32, a.a.O.

[34] Gupta, A.K.: Commitment, Competence, and Accountability, aus: Liberal Times 3/94 - Archiv des Liberalismus der Friedrich Naumann Stiftung D 462 / 96, S. 8, 1994

[35] Gupta, S. 9, a.a.O.

[36] Gupta, S. 11, a.a.O.

[37] Chossudovsky, M.: Global Brutal, Verlag 2001, Frankfurt / M., 11th edition, S. 79, 2002

[38] Source: vom 4.12.2002

[39] Source : vom 4.12.2002

[40] Hesselberger, D.: Das Grundgesetz, Verlag Luchterhand, 8th Edition, S. 175 - 182, 1991

[41] Hesselberger, ebd.

[42] BVerfGE 1, 208/225 und BVerfGE 2 1/73 (Stiftungsurteil), aus: Merten, H., Parteinahe Stiftungen im Parteienrecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, S. 14 ff., Baden-Baden 1999

[43] Hesselberger, ebd.

[44] Grundgesetz, Beck Texte 5003 im Deutschen Taschenbuchverlag DTV München, 37. Auflage, S. 20, 2001

[45] Pogorelskaja, S. 29 - 30, a.a.O.

[46] Hermann, R.: Absurde Vorwürfe, aus: Frankfurter Allgemeiner Zeitung, 30.10.2002 und http//: vom 11.11.2002

[47] Merten, H.: Parteinahe Stiftungen im Parteienrecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft Baden-Baden, S. 29 - 32, 1999

[48] FAZ, S. 13, December 7th, 2002

[49] BVerfGE 73/33, aus: Langguth, G., Politische Stiftungen und politische Bildung in Deutschland, aus: Archiv des Liberalismus der Friedrich Naumann Stiftung, B 34, S. 39, D 9/94, 1994

[50] Langguth, S. 38 - 47, a.a.O.

[51] Langguth, S. 38, a.a.O.

[52] Source: Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland, Internetpage: vom 2.12.2002

[53] Merten, S. 69 - 70, a.a.O.

[54] Source: vom 3.12.2002

[55] Source: vom 3.12.2003

[56] Merten, S. 67, a.a.O.

[57] Lord Harris of High Cross, in: Economic Affairs, Journal of the Institute of Economic Affairs, Volume 22, No.3, S. 40, September 2002

[58] Lottieri, C.: Eigentum und Freiheit: Die liberale Naturrechtsphilosophie bei Frédéric Bastiat, aus: Reflexionen 46, Hrsg.: Liberales Institut, Schweiz, S. 44, Februar 2002

[59] Lottieri, ebd.

[60] Some parts are own translation from the German booklet of the FNF / Liberal Institute “Stichwort Liberal”: Liberalismus

[61] Recommended literature: Rand, Ayn: Anthem

[62] Liberal Manifest of the Liberal International from 1947

[63] Lottieri, S. 45, a.a.O.

[64] Basic Principles of Liberalism and Liberal Democracy, Leaflet Liberal Facts from the Regional Office in RSA

[65] Naumann, Friedrich: Das Ideal der Freiheit, own translation, cover page, 1905

[66] Klitz, W. and Dias, C.: Global Partnerships, from: International Conference of the FNF; Liberal Forum - A Seminar in Cooperation with the Permanent Mission of Germany to the UN, N.Y., USA,S. 1, March 2001

[67] Shaping the Future, The Political Principles of the Work of the FNF, S. 3, April 2002

[68] Shaping the Future, a.a.O.

[69] The Dialogue Programme International Academy for Leadership, S. 3, app. 1990

[70] Schneider, R.: public speech as mentioned; with thankful personal permission; December 4th, 2002

[71] Erkens, R.: Die Tätigkeit der Friedrich Naumann Stiftung in der Republik Südafrika, Ein Manifest der liberalen Arbeit des Regionalbüros Südafrika in 6 Punkten, S. 1 - 9, September 2002

[72] Basic Principles of Liberalism and Liberal Democracy, Leaflet Liberal Facts from the Regional Office in RSA, S. 1 - 6, app. 1997

[73] Basic Principles …, ebd.

[74] Erkens, ebd.

[75] Erkens, ebd.

[76] Erkens, ebd.

[77] Kotler, S. VII, a.a.O.

[78] Pelsmacker, De P., Geuens, M. and van den Bergh, J.: Marketing Communications, Prentice Hall, Pearson Education Ltd Essex, S.2, 2001

[79] Aaker, D.: Strategic Market Management, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 5th Edition, S. 14, 1998

[80] Zerres, M.: Marketing, Klausurintensives Training, 1. Auflage, Kohlhammer Verlag Stuttgart, S. 1 - 2, 2000

[81] Laker, M.: Marketing für Energieversorger, Wirtschaftsverlag Ueberreuter, Frankfurt/Wien, S. 11, 2000

[82] Hatton, A.: The Definitive Guide to Marketing Planning, Prentice Hall, Pearson Education Ltd., Harlow, S. 6, 2000

[83] Hatton, ebd.

[84] Henschke, M.: Marketing Explanation Approach for the FNF, December 2002

[85] Aaker, S. 24, a.a.O.


ISBN (eBook)
915 KB
Institution / Hochschule
Universiteit van Amsterdam – University of Economic, FHW Berlin &
2,3 (B)
Marketing Concept Friedrich Naumann Foundation Example Regional Office Johannesburg



Titel: Marketing Concept for the Friedrich Naumann Foundation on the Example of the Regional Office in Johannesburg, RSA